This study discovered that Japanese, Singaporean, and Taiwanese firms, which compete with their Korean counterparts in the global market, have developed their unique systems of foreign exchange (FX) risk management. The uniqueness and differences are attributed to their own business environment characteristics and the different developmental stages of their FX markets. As their domestic economies are deeply integrated into the global financial markets, however, companies in all three countries are becoming more exposed to FX risks. Recognizing the costs incurred by ever increasing FX exposures and risks, they all endeavored to develop FX risk management systems.

FX risk management techniques can be classified into internal and external ones. Internal management refers to techniques that involves only in-house resources to avoid FX risks while the latter resort to external resources and market instruments such as financial derivatives to hedge the risks that cannot be avoided through internal management.
It is commonly observed in both Korean companies and foreign counterparts that larger firms with bigger exposures to FX risks tend to more keenly recognize the importance of FX risks. Also, those firms having overseas networks are more inclined to use internal techniques, such as netting through foreign subsidiaries.

The countries with longer histories of flexible exchange rate regimes, such as Japan and Singapore, have shown more systematic management of FX risks. Japanese firms focused more actively on coping with changing business environments caused by the New Foreign Exchange Transaction Act of 1998, rather than passively reacting to a strong Yen as in the past. Multinational companies in Singapore have practiced the most advanced system of FX risk management by using overseas networks. Taiwan, on the other hand, has displayed a rather passive stance towards FX risk management. Even though Taiwan adopted a floating exchange rate regime in 1978, and the size of its daily FX trading volume is almost same as that of Korea, most small and medium-sized companies in Taiwan have not practiced FX risk management.

While Japan, Singapore, and Taiwan have shown different degrees of development in the FX market, Japan - the third largest foreign exchange market in the world  possesses various FX risk-hedging products. The most extensively used market instrument is the outright forward contract. Outright forward contracts have been more widely used since the abolition of the Real Demand Principle in 1984. Larger Japanese firms have developed the Asset and Liability Management (ALM) system to cover overall FX exposures more flexibly on a continuous basis.

The foreign currency-denominated bonds have been also used as hedging devices. Impact loans have been widely used before the New Foreign Exchange Transaction Act. Impact laons are now utilized primarily for ALM purposes.
Singapore, as a small open economy, originally maintained a very passive stance towards the internationalization of the Singapore dollar. However, Singapore has devoted itself to making Singapore an international financial center by initiating capital account and foreign exchange liberalization along with the augmentation of its financial infrastructure. Multinational enterprises located in Singapore are also using outright forward contracts extensively. Since these firms hold high international credibility, they do not have any difficulty in securing credit lines from financial intermediaries in Singapore. In addition, the active transaction of Asian currencies in the Asian Dollar Market (AMD) has been supporting Singapore as an efficient international financial center for FX risk management.

With regards to Taiwanese firms, which are mostly small and medium-sized enterprises, FX risk management cannot, by nature, be a top priority. Especially when the government has frequently intervened in the foreign exchange market for the purpose of its currency stability. Thus, most companies have not recognized the need for FX risks management.
External asset and liability management is becoming increasingly important for large Korean companies with foreign subsidiaries. The efficient and comprehensive ALM system will be an important building bloc for FX risk management and requires a specialized system and competent human resources. The experiences of Japan and Singapore can be viewed as benchmarks for Korean companies. Regarding small and medium-sized firms in Korea, the Taiwanese case of using main banks or general trading companies can be considered as alternative options. In addition, it would be a desirable scheme to create a consortium for FX risk management among small and medium-sized companies.

Obviously, as the depth and breadth of the foreign exchange market in Korea is increasing, various financial products for FX risk hedging will be introduced. However, overall financial markets should be normalized and strengthened along with the development of institutional infrastructures. Although recovery of the economy from the financial crisis is underway, there still are many firms that cannot receive enough credit line for forward contracts. The reasons are twofold. First, the financial intermediaries are hesitating to make contracts because of the default risk of the firms. Second, financial intermediaries cannot square their position by contracting with foreign banks or entering Non-deliverable forward (NDF) markets because of low credit ratings. Only when the credit ratings of those domestic financial institutions have been enhanced through rigorous restructuring, will credit lines become more accessible.